ms dos

[skyman8081]

interesting. i hope one day a totally open source dos will come out that can detect cdroms and so on, use a lot of RAM, and also get mswindows installed on top of it.
dr-dos is cool, because it'snot microsoft, but it's still not open source.

and i think i would use dosemu (which is freedos in a vm under linux i think)

 like this?

FreeDOS is getting close.  ReactOS is also getting good.

[Aloone_Jonez]

How 'bout DOSBox?

DOSBox is an emulator and it sucks. It's slow and it's a waste of CPU power to emulate an x86 on an x86, unless you have an old game that won't run on a multi gigahertz machine or you want to run it on a Mac or something non-x86.

DOSEmu isn't an emulator it's a virtual machine running FREEDos. This is better but it dosn't run under Windows so I'd have to boot into Linux which in this case I don't bother I just boot into FreeDOS. And FreeDOS with an extender can handle up to 4GB of RAM which is way more than I have.

[Calum]

skyman: yes, like that. i never got windows running with any dos other than dr-dos or ms-dos though. ibm pc dos would work too, but it's just a fork of ms-dos.

jones: i don't need to boot into linux to use dosemu, since if the computer is on, linux is already running, there's an easy solution for you! however i agree, a real operating system is often better than an emulator (but not always depending on the design of the original operating system in question)

[Kintaro]

I have a copy of OS/2 2.0, its so rad compared to fucking Windows 3.1 and MS-DOS.

[mobrien_12]

DOSEmu isn't an emulator it's a virtual machine running FREEDos. This is better but it dosn't run under Windows so I'd have to boot into Linux which in this case I don't bother I just boot into FreeDOS. And FreeDOS with an extender can handle up to 4GB of RAM which is way more than I have.

 DOSemu can run any DOS, including DR-DOS and MS-DOS, and it can even run Win OS/2 (the special version of Windows 3.1 included in OS/2).

[Kintaro]

DOSBox is an emulator and it sucks. It's slow and it's a waste of CPU power to emulate an x86 on an x86, unless you have an old game that won't run on a multi gigahertz machine or you want to run it on a Mac or something non-x86.

DOSEmu isn't an emulator it's a virtual machine running FREEDos. This is better but it dosn't run under Windows so I'd have to boot into Linux which in this case I don't bother I just boot into FreeDOS. And FreeDOS with an extender can handle up to 4GB of RAM which is way more than I have.

Sometimes I wonder what is scarier, the fact that people with the resources right in their faces are so ignorant to the facts and resources right in their faces that they still deny what they could do. Or the fact that despite not knowing with certainity they still make claims of what cannot be done and make things more complex and confusing then they need to be; this says a lot about soceity - about how much people could doing. On top of that it also explains why.

DosBOX has a Windows release: http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/dosbox/DOSBox0.63-win32-installer.exe?download

Ahem.

[Aloone_Jonez]

I know DosBOX runs on Windows I don't like it because it's slow because it's an emulator. This is rather silly, I have an 86x CPU and using an emulator to run 86x software seems rather dumb. The only use I can see for DosBOX is running very old games that won't run on todays fast machines, or on a different processor like a MAC.

DosEMU is a lot faster despite it's name it's not a true emulator but FreeDOS running in virtual machine (just like VMware or MS Virtual machine) it doesn't emulate each CPU instruction. But this is (last time I checked) Linux only so I just reboot with FreeDOS to run any DOS programs that won't run under XP.

[Refalm]

DOSBox is an emulator and it sucks. It's slow and it's a waste of CPU power to emulate an x86 on an x86, unless you have an old game that won't run on a multi gigahertz machine or you want to run it on a Mac or something non-x86.

You know of any DOS game beyond Duke Nukem 3D, Megarace 2 or C&C: Red Alert that will be slow in DOSBox?

[Aloone_Jonez]

Quake is slow under DosBox especially when Windows is  using the swap file. I reboot and run it under plain DOS and it's very fast.

[Refalm]

Quake is slow under DosBox especially when Windows is  using the swap file. I reboot and run it under plain DOS and it's very fast.

Sorry I forgot about Quake. You're probably right then.

[E-61993]

i am not sure if anyone else heard this ,but i heared fom microsoft that WinXP did not have dos. I checked and sure enough there it was just moved into the acessories folder.I did this when XP came out.

[Refalm]

i am not sure if anyone else heard this ,but i heared fom microsoft that WinXP did not have dos. I checked and sure enough there it was just moved into the acessories folder.I did this when XP came out.

 That's not DOS, it's the NT command line (although it will run some DOS programs).

[Calum]

that's right, any systems using the NT kernel do not run DOS natively, while any systems based on the original mswindows (up to windows 98, not including any NT releases) are DOS based, so will run DOS programs natively.